I would say they have direct control, as they have to bless app before even it can be published on other stores and can revoke this blessing anytime.
And of course you don't own iOS -- were you under any impression otherwise?
I don't really understand this culture of buyers remorse. If you don't buy FOSS, you don't get FOSS.
This is what it is. I own this device in my pocket. I should be able to install, tinker, take apart, said device - granted voiding its warranty - without a company bricking the device intentionally or removing software from the device simply because I chose a p2p network over a centralized one.
Stop defending this. Once you sell something, it’s sold. It’s no longer yours. You may have made it, you may support it, but it’s no longer yours.
If you don't like the software that they do or don't deliver to you over the internet, that is something entirely different.
If you don't like that the phone connects to Apple's servers and uses the data delivered, then you shouldn't have bought a product that works that way. Or alternatively, you can take it apart and change it. Nobody is stopping you.
But Apple doesn't owe you an ongoing service that works exactly the way you like just because you bought one of their devices.
If unlocking an iPhone and running e.g. AOSP on it were feasible, people would be doing it. And you know that. Your argument is disingenuous.
Equating something like this to closed source software is why some people don’t take FOSS seriously.
You might think I was being facetious, but I’m being completely serious: the only way for FOSS to compete is by producing good products and bringing them to market. If FOSS advocates keep trying to fight some software licensing culture war instead of producing good technology, they’re not going to change anyone’s mind. 99.999% of people do not give two shits about a software license, they just want to use a damn phone.
And I'm not a foss advocate, I just want to be able to run software of my choosing and without spyware, as has been the case since the advent of personal computing.
As a side note, legality seems irrelevant to your position. What if a world government mandated optional sideloading + unlocking? Wouldn't you then argue against that law?
I also want to run the software of my choosing. But there’s not a single phone you can completely do that with. Some of this is due to design decisions, some of it is due to corporate lock-in, and some of it is due to regulatory requirements.
I wouldn’t be against a law requiring side loading and unlocking, I would be in favor of it. This only addresses part of the software on a phone, though. There’s a lot of software on a phone beyond user space applications.
But I do think it would be reasonable to put some hurdles to make it difficult to do. There are completely valid reasons to protect the average user from being scammed by malicious software.
To your other point, firmware is another battle entirely and currently has less practical value.
It would be great if vendors would be mandated to clearly separate communication about the product and the services on top, so they would have to compete again on actual product functionality, but so far it's not the case...